I
ibkc
Guest
I still want to know what part of his beliefs were racist. AFAIK, he didn’t write that only black babies were destined for Hell or anything like that. I’m happy to be corrected, as always.
- Status
R
ralphinal
Guest
Considering where he was from, I’d rather doubt he held any ideas like that. He may have had African friends or even black relatives. Hippo is in Africa, after all.
I
ibkc
Guest
Exactly.
B
BartBurk
Guest
I’m not saying it was. And I am not in any way saying Brigham Young didn’t establish racist doctrines. He did. Those racist doctrines did not however come from the Mormon scriptures except as interpreted by Brigham Young. The RLDS did not follow that and immediately gave blacks the priesthood after the Civil War. I’m just indicating that is not enthroned in Mormon scriptures as some here are trying to establish. If it had been established in Mormon scriptures the RLDS would have had difficulty in giving blacks the priesthood at such an early date.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Ok. I was just confused as to why Augustine was your choice. A pope might have been a better example, as his words have more weight than a Doctor of the Church.
What is amazing to me is that it took SO LONG to go back and fix it. That is hard to reconcile with the idea that the Mormon Apostles are guided by the Holy Spirit. First, they deny the priesthood, then go 150 years before giving it back, assuming that the one installment by JS wasn’t a unique case.
M
majick275
Guest
well first let’s state that RLDS and LDS have different scriptures. the PoGP is the basis for denying blacks the priesthood. secondly, while the RLDS may not have been AS racist as the LDS, the BoM itself is still pretty in your face about the lamanites being cursed with dark skin and pretty ugly about what that means.
A
armyross
Guest
I guess Alma must have left?
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
Well the thing is, just like polygamy, denying blacks the priesthood is part of Mormon history, a part of their history that they’d rather be left “in the past”.
The fact of the matter is that, regardless of the scriptures quoted, this form of racism was practiced by the Mormons for a very long time. But BartBurk is also correct that this sort of racism was pervasive throughout society at the time. The difference is that it was institutionalized by the Mormon church and whether or not they want to quibble over whether there is scripture specifically denying blacks the priesthood, it took a “revelation” to give it to them, and that IS in their scriptures.
The fact of the matter is that, regardless of the scriptures quoted, this form of racism was practiced by the Mormons for a very long time. But BartBurk is also correct that this sort of racism was pervasive throughout society at the time. The difference is that it was institutionalized by the Mormon church and whether or not they want to quibble over whether there is scripture specifically denying blacks the priesthood, it took a “revelation” to give it to them, and that IS in their scriptures.
B
BartBurk
Guest
You are right about that. It is hard to see any inspiration in the way Mormons handled the priesthood issue with blacks – the withholding of the priesthood by Brigham Young was pure . I just don’t think it necessarily holds that early Mormonism in Nauvoo and prior to Nauvoo was inherently racist. I’ve never gotten that feeling reading the original words of Joseph Smith. The way Brigham handled it is a good example of how Utah Mormonism was racist – I think that is largely past. I don’t think I can ascribe it to modern Mormons, especially young Mormons who are used to seeing interracial marriage in their wards and black Mormon priesthood leaders. I’ve seen black bishops and black elders quorum presidents. There are thriving Mormon communities in many parts of Latin America and Africa where blacks predominate.
I would say modern Mormonism is no more racist than any other church. Modern Mormonism certainly is harmed by its legacy of left by Brigham Young, but I can’t blame modern Mormons for that. I was a Mormon at the time blacks were given the priesthood and for almost every Mormon I knew it was wonderful news to celebrate. I’d rather let them celebrate rather than criticize them for their progress. Maybe next year they’ll accept the doctrine of the Trinity. If that happens I will celebrate that rather than criticize them for how long it took them to get there.
T
tomarin
Guest
it’s not possible for the Bible or for Augustine to be racist, since the modern concept of “race” is only a few hundred years old. people in the world of antiquity did not have a concept analogous to “race”.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
BartBurk, the Mormons have a “Trinity” they just define it differently. Just as their understanding of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit is different, so too is their definition of Trinity. As for accepting the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you. Since you say you were once a Mormon, then you obviously would know that their theology is completely incompatible. For them to accept the doctrine of the Trinity is for them to become an entirely different faith.
R
ralphinal
Guest
The issue to me has nothing to do with time, per se. I have no issue with granting Mormons the fact that they did change it and they have made progress. My issue is that they claim to be the one true Church, restored by God, and then they do this. They claim continuous revelation, and somehow this happens.
Anyway, I am glad for the Mormon people who, like their faith, have moved past skin color as an issue.
M
majick275
Guest
i challenge that they have past skin color. mormons are very much into being a “chosen people” and in their teachings there is nothing more choice than being a white american. their scriptures still contain blatant examples of racist doctrine. while it’s great that all races are now welcome to participate it still seems condescending at best. like junior members or something. at least you don’t have to listen to all the patronizing talks by arrogant utard transplants about how great it is to be out in the mission field helping the lamanite peoples to “blossom” anymore. i guess that’s worth something.
R
ralphinal
Guest
First, can the scriptures say one thing and the people believe something else?
Second, what percentage of Mormons are non-White?
To me, the doctrine within scriptures of skin color reflecting state of soul is proof that they are not inspired. That is just one guy’s thought.
Z
zerinus
Guest
A
Alma147
Guest
Sorry for the delay, Amy. I had an appointment.
I don’t know the reason for the prohibition–and I don’t imagine you know why only descendants of Levi were allowed the priesthood anciently. God never said why no one else but Levites were eligible–and I don’t know of any authoritative statement for the prohibition that was in place from 1847 to 1978. I just accept it the same as I accept the fact that Jesus didn’t explain why the apostles were not to go to the gentiles until after His resurrection.
Alma
R
ralphinal
Guest
R
ralphinal
Guest
Well, it was the Levites who refused to worship the Golden Calf and took up swords against those who did. But, that was after God chose Moses, who was Levite.
Z
zerinus
Guest
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Because Christ was male and the Priest is acting in persona Christi. I may as well be offended that Christ was male.
What does that have to do with race?
- Status